Having photo of Jesus Christ in house does not mean person has converted to Christianity: Bombay High Court

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court recently observed that a person having a photograph of Jesus Christ in her house would not strictly mean that she has converted to Christianity [Parvi Ashish Chakravarti v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.]..A division bench of Justices Prithviraj Chavan and Urmila Joshi Phalke made the observation while allowing a petition challenging a district caste scrutiny committee's rejection of a minor girl's claim that she belonged to the ‘Mahar’ caste..The committee arrived at its decision after its vigilance cell found a photograph of Jesus Christ in the girl's house during a visit..The High Court, however, opined that merely having a photograph of Jesus in one's house would not imply that the person has converted to Christianity."Merely because the officer of the Vigilance Cell, during his visit to the house of the petitioner, noticed a photograph of Lord Jesus Christ, he assumed that the petitioner’s family professes Christian religion. No sane man will accept or believe that merely because there is a photograph of Jesus Christ in the house would ipso facto mean that a person had converted himself into Christianity", the Court noted in its October 10 order..The petitioner (minor girl) also explained to the Court that the photograph had been gifted by someone and, therefore, was displayed in the house..The petitioner further claimed to be a practising Buddhist. She sought said that she should be certified as a member of the ‘Mahar’ community, which is recognized as a Scheduled Caste under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order..The vigilance cell officers had alleged in their report that the father and grandfather of the girl had converted to Christianity..However, the Court observed that there was not a shred of evidence to prove that the father or the grandfather had undergone baptism to convert to Christianity..The Court also noted that the traditional occupation of the petitioner and her family was labour work. Further, the Court was also told that marriages in the family were performed as per Buddhist rituals. .In view of these aspects, the Court refused to accept the vigilance cell report."This so called report of the vigilance officer merits to be discarded at the threshold being figment of his imagination, more particularly in light of the tradition of Buddhism being followed by petitioner’s family sans any material to contradict the claim of the petitioner," the Court said. .With these observations, the division bench directed the caste scrutiny committee to issue a caste validity certificate to the petitioner, certifying that she belonged to the ‘Mahar’ caste The same should be done within two weeks from the receipt of the Court's order, the bench directed..[Read Judgment]